MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => Alamy.com => Topic started by: gemmy12 on November 25, 2011, 11:59
-
Hello friends..
I am about to submit photos for alamy QC and curious to know how much longer did Alamy take to sell your 1st photo after your registration.
So lets share your experience with 1st sale in alamy and how big/small did you earn from that 1st sale... and what makes you keep posting photos in Alamy ?
:-)
Do tell the portfolio size at the time of 1st sale comparing today's port size..
-
I had my first sale 11 months after joining. If memory serves me right, I didn't actually upload anything for about six months and when I had the sale, there were only a few hundred images online. Gross sale was $68.
-
oh.. long time... I am affraid that most of the responses will mentions the duration in months lol
and after that do you sell photo (if not exactly then atleast somewhat similar to) often ? what is your portfolio size ?
-
As I mentioned in the payout threshold thread, according to folks on Alamy's forums sellers can expect one sale per year per 100 photos online. My numbers hold up to the theory. I have just over 2000 images online and have had 19 sales this year.
-
The first time, it took three months. Then I closed my account down in 2008 (for business reasons). I opened my account again this past May and I licensed two images in July - it was a topic not covered anywhere else (including the micros). It depends on what you have available and how large your portfolio is. It takes at least 3 months (Alamy gives you a default rank for 100 days because they know this) and for most folks, they won't see regular sales until after the first year.
-
The first time, it took three months. Then I closed my account down in 2008 (for business reasons). I opened my account again this past May and I licensed two images in July - it was a topic not covered anywhere else (including the micros). It depends on what you have available and how large your portfolio is. It takes at least 3 months (Alamy gives you a default rank for 100 days because they know this) and for most folks, they won't see regular sales until after the first year.
What is that rank about ? new thing about alamy for me...!
-
As I mentioned in the payout threshold thread, according to folks on Alamy's forums sellers can expect one sale per year per 100 photos online. My numbers hold up to the theory. I have just over 2000 images online and have had 19 sales this year.
lo people posting images in alamy must have great patience ! :-)
-
A lot of folks have gigantic portfolios numbering in the 10s of thousands! No patience required when you've done the work.
-
is it really more fruitful to post alamy exclusively ?
-
Rank relates to your click through rate (how many times a registered buyer views your image) as well as how many images you have licensed and other factors that are not known to the public. It determines what order images are displayed in a search.
As Karimala says - there are people making good money from Alamy but they have large portfolios. Average about 1 image licensed per month per 1,000 images.
-
so rank is given broadly to a member... so are you people dont get bored from alamy as results come quite late here ?
-
I'm have +300 images RF ( will start sending some RM in 2012 ), 100% acceptance rate, almost one year there and have one sale... novell use... 0,41c
Anyway, only last month I start re-keywording all images and start getting more zooms , better CTR.. lets hope ;D
-
good. I wish you may earn more in alamy Paulo :-) and i may learn from your shots lol
-
A lot of folks have gigantic portfolios numbering in the 10s of thousands! No patience required when you've done the work.
Yeah, but it's a hell of a lot of work. My return is less than $1 per file per year there. If you've already got 20,000 files posted and you can sit back and watch Ł1,000 a month roll in I'm sure it feels quite good, but the uploading process is horrendous and it would be pretty much a full time job to shoot, process and push through 2,000 files a year.
-
yeah you are right Baldricks...so can you guys suggest.. is alamy worth for amateur photographers ?
-
Rank relates to your click through rate (how many times a registered buyer views your image) as well as how many images you have licensed and other factors that are not known to the public. It determines what order images are displayed in a search.
I've had 100 there for about 6 months without a sale. It looks like the longer I go without making a sale, the less likely I am to ever make one. A beautiful system!
I had no problem getting images accepted, but obviously it's been a waste of time.
-
I went a few years w/o a sale, but I had under 100 images for that time. When they dropped their size limit I started pushing images there in my downtime. I have over 1,000 images there now and have had a few sales in the last year (more recently) - when/if they all clear I'll have enough for a payout. Sales seem to be a little random though - both in subject and return. At some point I'd like to send them some more editorial street type travel photos, but that is relatively low on my priority list.
Don't expect quick returns there, but one good sale can equal many months on one of the small tier sites.
-
One sale per 100 images per year?
What is the average payout for these sales?
The payouts must be extremely high, otherwise surely nobody would bother uploading thousands of files?
If I had my 3000 images there and only got 30 sales at 10 dollars...I mean you can earn more than that in 2 or 3 days on istock.
-
Based on a recent thread, my guess is the the average sale is somewhere between $75-125. Mine is right around $100 over the years. I've had sales as low as $6 and as high as $380 in three years. It's not unheard of to make a $1000 sale, and a handful of folks have had $10K+ sales. RM pays more than RF.
The folks who have 10s of thousands of images have been shooting a very very long time. Alamy gets 100% of my attention these days as I'm focused on RM stuff rather than RF, and I'm definitely seeing results. I've earned twice as much there than at BigStock and 123RF this year with a smaller portfolio.
As for exclusivity, Alamy doesn't require it or provide the option, so it's up to you whether you want to go exclusive or not. Whether it's a better choice or not entirely depends on your portfolio. It's the best option for what I'm shooting right now, but for others it might not be.
-
I am interested in RM as an alternative to RF.
I only have two RM files on getty, but only got a normal "RF level" payout so far. I think I uploaded the wrong material.
I might give alamy a go and just slowly build up another portfolio there.
is it difficult to delete single images, if you want to? For instance if a file hasnŽt sold in two years, I might want to move it into RF and into my portfolio on istock (I know it can never go back to RM)
Or shuld one give RM files more time? 3 years, 5 years?
Thank you for the numbers, this is certainly a decent level.
-
It's very easy to remove images, but you might have to wait up to six months for them to be removed completely (my last deletions only took a week). Alamy's management section allows you to search for specific images by keyword or Alamy's unique ID number, so you don't have to dig through your portfolio trying to remember exactly when you uploaded something. It's the easiest and best system around, from my experience.
IMO I wouldn't remove anything after any period of time, but then again my RM portfolio contains images geared towards the historical and editorial that would never do well or be accepted on the micros. I also have some photos that compositionally aren't very good, but have elements a buyer might be interested in. My highest sale was on a photo of copper pots that is pretty much a piece of crap. HUGE shadow along a wall that does nothing to make the photo look good. It just happened that the angle of one of the pots worked with the book cover design and was the only one available with that angle. The photo didn't need to be good for their purposes. They just wanted the pot.
(http://img2.imagesbn.com/images/35830000/35835981.JPG)
(http://www.alamy.com/thumbs/6/%7B101FCFDC-9267-424D-BB9A-E3F6C8E65BC5%7D/B1CWFF.jpg)
-
Very interesting, thank you. So I could upload normal content and just wait and see what happens. This might be easier to leave in RM.
I think IŽll browse through the alamy collection a bit more. I think if someone has thousands of images there, they must know what they are doing.
-
One sale per 100 images per year?
What is the average payout for these sales?
The payouts must be extremely high, otherwise surely nobody would bother uploading thousands of files?
If I had my 3000 images there and only got 30 sales at 10 dollars...I mean you can earn more than that in 2 or 3 days on istock.
You can make intelligent choices about what to send for Alamy. For example, very specific locations which wouldn't have general interest, or photos taken in the sort of natural light that the micros (OK, I only know about iStock) wouldn't accept, e.g. Scotland in winter or rainforest.
Money 'to me' averages around or above iStock's EL, but usually for uses that wouldn't require an EL on iStock (very few publications have print runs of over 100,000 imprints).
-
You are right in that you cannot depend on Alamy for stable income unless you have a substantial port.
With less than 800 RM images, I have managed to get at least one sale or over $100 per month. However because of the high payout threshold until recently and Alamy's lenient policy in collecting money from the buyers (some of my distribution sales were cleared after 6-7 months), the gap between each payment was rather big and long. I could get $500-600 in one payment but it was likely 5-6 months or longer after the sales. Even with the lower threshold which was just announced, I am still $2 short of $175 from my next payment.
I have no idea how RF sales are.
Very interesting, thank you. So I could upload normal content and just wait and see what happens. This might be easier to leave in RM.
I think IŽll browse through the alamy collection a bit more. I think if someone has thousands of images there, they must know what they are doing.
-
Very interesting, thank you. So I could upload normal content and just wait and see what happens. This might be easier to leave in RM.
I think IŽll browse through the alamy collection a bit more. I think if someone has thousands of images there, they must know what they are doing.
Search Alamy for Jeff Greenberg. His portfolio has over 78,000 images and counting...mostly street photography. He's a frequent poster on their forums and openly shares his sales numbers (well over $100K per year in earnings from Alamy alone).
-
Well, I am photo exclusive, so I can only upload RM anyway.
I wonder if locations from Germany are interesting at all, or if they mostly have customers for the UK/US market.
But if they accept things with hard or suboptimal lighting, it might be interesting to just slowly and patiently build a port there, especially if these are images that usually wouldnŽt get into istock as RF.
Alamy doesnŽt show download numbers and I have become very appreciative of the companies that donŽt advertise to thieves what makes me money. I believe it is an important component of my success on getty - nobody knows what I sell, so noone copies it. So my files seem to have a better shelf life.
Alamy also takes editorial from what I see. Hm. I like the way editorial is beginning to sell on istock. But I might try putting a few into RM.
@karimala: thank you!!
-
Just found this on their press page:
http://www.alamy.com/pressreleases/2011/earn_money_from_your_photos.asp (http://www.alamy.com/pressreleases/2011/earn_money_from_your_photos.asp)
Really impressive.
-
cobalt, re "I wonder if locations from Germany are interesting at all..."
Alamy already has an offices in several countries, including Germany.
(In fact, one of my more recent Alamy sales, around $100, was to a German magazine.)
-
Very interesting, thank you. So I could upload normal content and just wait and see what happens. This might be easier to leave in RM.
I think IŽll browse through the alamy collection a bit more. I think if someone has thousands of images there, they must know what they are doing.
Search Alamy for Jeff Greenberg. His portfolio has over 78,000 images and counting...mostly street photography. He's a frequent poster on their forums and openly shares his sales numbers (well over $100K per year in earnings from Alamy alone).
Yeah, but remember that at Alamy they quote the full sale price as their earnings, not their cut, so his "well over 100k" probably works out at $78,000 or $1 per image per year .... just the same as most other people. Even if he was pulling in $150,000 as his share of the sales, it would still be less than $2 per image per year, which is a tenth of what he might get from having a similar number of ordinary images on the micros and represents a very low return on effort.
Alamy's like a lottery. You never know when a fat prize will drop into your hands. But unless you have invested tens of thousands of hours in shooting and uploading you're not going to make a huge pile of cash.
I don't know how anyone could get those numbers up without batch uploading piles of similars, which isn't allowed.
-
Based on my experience of uploading editorial to SS for six years, you'll be better off not selling it at IS as RF. None of my editorial shots SS have covered even basic expenses from the day's shooting, even after six years! Alamy is perfect for that kind of stuff.
Most sales do originate in the US/UK, but I've had a couple of sales in Germany and one in Russia.
-
$1 per image per year for street photography without model or property releases is pretty impressive, IMO.
-
Just found this on their press page:
[url]http://www.alamy.com/pressreleases/2011/earn_money_from_your_photos.asp[/url] ([url]http://www.alamy.com/pressreleases/2011/earn_money_from_your_photos.asp[/url])
Really impressive.
I suspect that's the exception, rather than the rule, which is why they're making such a song and dance about it.
-
I am just browsing through the library - they have a lot of German content.
In RM I see images from trade shows, sport events, from inside museums - is there no legal problem with that? Or is everything covered with an editorial license?
""well over 100k" probably works out at $78,000 or $1 per image per year .... just the same as most other people."
Yes, thank you, I agree it looks like that would be the average. And like you say it is an unbelievable amount of work to upload nearly 80k images. When does he shoot?
On the other hand, a return of nearly 80k a year does bring in money to pay for part time help with uploading and keywording.
I am sure I can make a lot more money on istock/getty with RF, but I like the idea of adding a different outlet for images that I could not sell on istock.
I donŽt travel as much as I used to, but if I can think of a style that might work for alamy, I can just keep that in mind when I walk around town or go anywhere.
I used to enjoy street shooting but stopped when I started with stock.
So I have already enjoyed adding a few images to the istock editorial collection and am amazed that from the 40 images I uploaded this year I got 13 sales.
I believe the istock editorial collection has a good future, but many images (sports, events) they donŽt take. And they pay attention to good quality lighting, so you canŽt upload everything (which is good - I donŽt mind that they only pick the best files)
Between istock and Alamy it looks like I could squeeze every cent out of normal walk around day shots.
Thank you for all the good information everyone. I have been doing stock for 7 years, but I really donŽt know much about the wider industry. :)
-
I wonder if locations from Germany are interesting at all, or if they mostly have customers for the UK/US market.
Where your pictures sell doesn't necessarily tie to where the photo was taken.
For example, I have photos of:
A Scottish seabird cliff licensed by a Japanese TV channel,
A photo of a church in Madagascar licensed by a Brazilian textbook publisher for the Brazilian market,
A photo of a winter garden in Glasgow for a South African textbook
A photo from Belfast for a Japanese TV company
Two photos from Belfast for "German speaking countries"
Photo from Glasgow for the US.
Photo from Botswana for Germany
Photo from London for France
etc etc
-
You may also find this interesting:
http://www.alamy.com/corporate-social-responsibility.asp (http://www.alamy.com/corporate-social-responsibility.asp)
-
Yes, thank you, I agree it looks like that would be the average. And like you say it is an unbelievable amount of work to upload nearly 80k images. When does he shoot?
Judging from that article he is also selling on a lot of other sites, so my guess is that he is an image factory. It might be just him shooting but throwing a pile of CF cards at assistants to do the nasty bit,
Anyway, I'm going to see if I can process 50+ RM images and upload them there tomorrow, just to see how difficilt it is.
-
IŽd love to hear how that goes. With 1 dollar a year it will be a numbers game.
And thanks Sue for the interesting examples. Yes, it looks like they have customers all over.
I am going into town tomorrow, we have a lot of xmas markets open now. So IŽll try to shoot for istock editorial, maybe take some editorial videos for pond5 and think of what I can do for alamy as well. IŽll upload to istock immediatly, maybe it will go live in time to be sold tis year and process the rest over the holidays, or whenever I have time for it.
Alamy will be adding video next year, so that is why I want to learn how their system works. I suppose they will take editorial video as well.
-
Yes, thank you, I agree it looks like that would be the average. And like you say it is an unbelievable amount of work to upload nearly 80k images. When does he shoot?
Judging from that article he is also selling on a lot of other sites, so my guess is that he is an image factory. It might be just him shooting but throwing a pile of CF cards at assistants to do the nasty bit,
I can't imagine how he could do it all himself. It takes me ages to research and double check captions, descriptions and keywords for editorial photos, whether for iStock or alamy. I know he just flings some keywords into the Alamy caption field - doesn't even take out truncated words!
-
Just a thought...Alamy has a news program that will allow you to get your images online within 24 hours of uploading. No waiting for days on end in the queue, like at IS.
Greenberg is just one guy...he's not an image factory. It's just that he's been shooting for a couple of decades and has built a sizeable portfolio over the years.
In RM I see images from trade shows, sport events, from inside museums - is there no legal problem with that? Or is everything covered with an editorial license?
No problem at all. However, in regards to museums Alamy does require you to obtain permission from the museum first to avoid potential conflicts later (permission to shoot, which isn't the same as obtaining a property release...the property release only allows buyers to use an image for commercial purposes). Buyers will have to contact the museum if they want to use the image for commercial purposes.
-
In RM I see images from trade shows, sport events, from inside museums - is there no legal problem with that? Or is everything covered with an editorial license?
When you upload, you have to say whether there are people (even dots or parts of people) in your photo and whether you have MRs, and whether PRs are needed and whether you have them. If you type yes/no to either/both of these, the onus is firmly on the buyer.
There are some 'issues' with the system. For example, if you have some tiny, unrecogniseable people that you don't want to clone out (or you'd have to set 'digitally manipulated') you put in the number of people, for example, "more than four people". That then becomes an option during the search system. But your dots of people are NOT what a searcher wants if they specify, for example, "Glasgow, more than four people" - it's pretty certain they don't want indistinguishable dots.
This gives a bit more flexibility for sales. For example, recently because of a site bug, I could briefly post on the forums and I asked a question about a particular photo with fairly indistinguishable people. I was assured it would not be accepted in the main collection (despite the fact that indistinguishable people from the same location have gone into the main collection within the past couple of months). However, on Alamy, this photo mightacceptable for a tourist poster/brochure, but iStock would regard that as commercial. At Alamy, the buyer weighs up any risk.
Also, on iStock, you're not supposed to tidy up editorial photos. They specified you couldn't remove a small spot from someone's skin, so I'd infer that would also include bird droppings, small items of litter etc. Tiny editings which don't affect the main truth of the image (e.g. a bit of litter that the wind could blow away) may be acceptible, or if bigger, you can designate your image as manipulated, and the buyer can specify they don't want that (In fact, most of my Alamy photos are not manipulated other than levels, noise etc), and I've never noticed a searcher specifying that they don't want that.)
The sports issue on iStock is bizarre, and I suspect is being dictated by Getty. I had some photos of a local Highland Games rejected, as they were 'professional athletes'. In fact, I knew they were local men who just do this for fun, and it was in a public park. I queried it and was told it was because I didn't have permission to shoot there. That was just rubbish - after all they said they would, and did, accept Pipe Bands performing there. As it happens, I know the organiser quite well, and he couldn't imagine any possible restriction. So I asked what sort of permission would be acceptable, knowing I could get it from him, and they went back to the "we would regard these as professional athletes". So I got the photos released by CR and they and the rest went to Alamy (where they haven't sold yet ...).
Alamy have said that they don't want photos taken in museums without permission. We got emails about this a couple of months back. But they don't seem to proactively go through the collection culling images Or maybe, like at iStock, it can take years). There are a few photos on Alamy of a small Glasgow museum which doesn't allow photos at all (not one of us got permission to shoot inside, even with a camera phone, for our photojournalism course, and the tutor said he was 'just testing us'), some from a place where I got willing permission to take photos for the course but a flat refusal to be allowed to submit as editorial (unless I could specify the publication), and even some from inside the Great Synagogue in Florence, where you have to put your bag and any electronics, including phones, into lockers before you go into the grounds, and go through a metal detector. Intriguing, because these are mostly single pics, whereas if I had permission to shoot and upload, I'd have tons of photos covering every aspect.
-
Fascinating!
I think IŽll avoid the museums, I doubt that is a major market.
But if I can upload images from a local and outdoor sportsfestival, like the cologne marathon, that might be interesting.
And if their news service is RM, if I see a good looking disaster near me, IŽll upload that as well.
-
Greenberg is just one guy...he's not an image factory. It's just that he's been shooting for a couple of decades and has built a sizeable portfolio over the years.
I don't see how that's possible. Alamy's been going about 12 years, so he would have to shoot, process, upload and keyword 18 files a day every single day including weekends and Christmas since the very beginning to get where he is now. It doesn't seem humanly possible. He must have assistance.
-
Fascinating!
I think IŽll avoid the museums, I doubt that is a major market.
But if I can upload images from a local and outdoor sportsfestival, like the cologne marathon, that might be interesting.
And if their news service is RM, if I see a good looking disaster near me, IŽll upload that as well.
I think you have to be accepted as a news photographer to get into their news stream and then you can't send them commercial work. Certainly, if you have any news images you are not allowed to be promoted in their special commercial section.
-
And if their news service is RM, if I see a good looking disaster near me, IŽll upload that as well.
Any photo for which you don't have MRs or PRs are automatically RM.
There's also a fast track for uploading hot news, but you need to establish your credentials, or be invited, beforehand.
http://www.alamy.com/Blog/contributor/archive/2011/10/18/4890.aspx (http://www.alamy.com/Blog/contributor/archive/2011/10/18/4890.aspx)
-
Greenberg is just one guy...he's not an image factory. It's just that he's been shooting for a couple of decades and has built a sizeable portfolio over the years.
I don't see how that's possible. Alamy's been going about 12 years, so he would have to shoot, process, upload and keyword 18 files a day every single day including weekends and Christmas since the very beginning to get where he is now. It doesn't seem humanly possible. He must have assistance.
This is his port:
http://www.alamy.com/search/searchresults.aspx?qt=Jeff+Greenberg&ct=&submitsearch=Search&go=1&a=-1&archive=1&size=0xFF (http://www.alamy.com/search/searchresults.aspx?qt=Jeff+Greenberg&ct=&submitsearch=Search&go=1&a=-1&archive=1&size=0xFF)
-
Greenberg is just one guy...he's not an image factory. It's just that he's been shooting for a couple of decades and has built a sizeable portfolio over the years.
I don't see how that's possible. Alamy's been going about 12 years, so he would have to shoot, process, upload and keyword 18 files a day every single day including weekends and Christmas since the very beginning to get where he is now. It doesn't seem humanly possible. He must have assistance.
This is his port:
[url]http://www.alamy.com/search/searchresults.aspx?qt=Jeff+Greenberg&ct=&submitsearch=Search&go=1&a=-1&archive=1&size=0xFF[/url] ([url]http://www.alamy.com/search/searchresults.aspx?qt=Jeff+Greenberg&ct=&submitsearch=Search&go=1&a=-1&archive=1&size=0xFF[/url])
I don't know how long he's been shooting, but it's well over 20 years. It will be interesting to see if he met his goal of 5,000 new photos this year (he met it last year without known assistance). I know a man who along with his wife and son have a portfolio of over 700,000 stock photos, some of which are on Alamy. http://www.tommyersphotography.com/ (http://www.tommyersphotography.com/) They've been shooting for about 40 years now.
-
[....]
I think you have to be accepted as a news photographer to get into their news stream and then you can't send them commercial work. Certainly, if you have any news images you are not allowed to be promoted in their special commercial section.
Here's a way to apply for Creative if you have both Editorial and Commercial images:
Put your Commercial images in a pseudonym different from one(s) used for Editorial images.
Open a 2nd account
Ask Alamy to move images under your Commercial pseudonym to 2nd account
Apply for Creative through that Commercial images account
-
@Baldricks - he is only one guy. He travels to different places and shoots there. Recently he spent two or three days in New Orleans and added 450 images to his port. He does not edit much - he barely learned how to use the burn and dodge tool this year. He recently mentioned in a thread of another guy (topic of procrastination or some sort) that rather than a 1 image per day commitment, the guy should consider a 10 image per day commitment - as he does. It's not hard...think like a photographer, not a micro shooter and you'll find it to be relatively do-able.
It's not hard to get 1,000 images up on Alamy. This is especially true if you prove yourself and get accepted to upload either via the news/archival route or the creative route. If you commit to go out and shoot, you can create a fairly large portfolio quickly. I've added over 1,000 new images since May myself and my goal is another 4,000 by the end of 2012.
I have to be honest...and I know I'll stir the pot with this comment, but editorial images do not belong on the micros. These images are unique and your choice is to earn less than $5 or $6 US for these images on the micros, or earn (net) $40 on the images at a macro agency like Alamy for editorial licensing. This includes both newspapers and textbooks.
Creative images are different.
-
If you commit to go out and shoot, you can create a fairly large portfolio quickly.
... if you don't live in a rainy area, having one of its rainiest years on record. But also you either have to live in an area with photographic/saleable things around and/or going on or travel. Even the travelling takes time! If you live out in the boonies, your saleable shots are going to be limited in scope and variety.
I keep hearing a legend about some bloke who only shoots on some (un-named) small Scottish island and allegedly does "very well" on Alamy - but I've never seen it substantiated, i.e. by a post by the bloke, or a link to his port, or even his name. I suspect that's an apocryphal tale, but I'd be intrigued to be proved wrong.
-
I can tell you that in Minneapolis, in the winter, your scenic and travel shot possibilities are somewhat limited. :-)
-
I just posted 4 images for QC last night... lets hope for best.. once i am accepted I am ready to try my photos from rural and tribal parts of India.. but for that i need to be approved man !!!!! lol (Fingers crossed )
-
Good luck!!
-
I have to be honest...and I know I'll stir the pot with this comment, but editorial images do not belong on the micros.
I recently came to that conclusion too. I shot a couple of tribal fiestas in Asia this year with many groups in different colorful ethnic outfits and set-ups each time. On Dreamstime, they don't sell at all and the last time I was hit by the "similars" monster after uploading just 4 images, when in fact the series told a story (I didn't process the full shoot of 300 pictures yet since DT would reject them as "similars"). Some very generic editorial sells very well though (I have a level 5 editorial), which means you can put a striking generic micro-ish shot on micro but send the rest to RM and relax.
-
Gotta agree with Attila. Most editorial subjects don't sell well on the micros. I got lucky when Proposition 8 passed in California banning gay marriage and shot a protest at the state capitol, but other than that, my editorial shots are far from being money makers. One sale at Alamy earns more than 100 on the micros.
-
alamy traffic doesnŽt look to good:
http://siteanalytics.compete.com/alamy.com/ (http://siteanalytics.compete.com/alamy.com/)
does anybody know why?
-
can we know the details of our own photographs in alamy like number of views and downloads etc ?
-
can we know the details of our own photographs in alamy like number of views and downloads etc ?
Yes.
-
ok. Thanks stockastic
-
alamy traffic doesnŽt look to good:
[url]http://siteanalytics.compete.com/alamy.com/[/url] ([url]http://siteanalytics.compete.com/alamy.com/[/url])
does anybody know why?
Well, I certainly don't mean to dismiss the big disparity in traffic size, but keep in mind that Alamy is not a microstockgroup agency, where making Lots of rather small sales that involve little-to-no Customer Service is crucial.
(BTW, the link leads to info based on U.S. Data Only, and Alamy's home base is in England, though it's continuing to open offices in other countries.)
-
I am sure you can make good money there. But I do wonder why there would be such a strong drop.
So what you are saying is - you havent seen or heard of any complaints of sales dropping significantly in 2011?
-
A lot of Alamy's traffic comes over the phone, too, with direct sales. They have picture researchers on staff to help customers find the right image. The micros typically don't offer that service. Plus they partner with quite a few distributors around the world.
My sales tripled this year without adding much new content, so they are doing something right.
-
If you commit to go out and shoot, you can create a fairly large portfolio quickly.
... if you don't live in a rainy area, having one of its rainiest years on record. But also you either have to live in an area with photographic/saleable things around and/or going on or travel. Even the travelling takes time! If you live out in the boonies, your saleable shots are going to be limited in scope and variety.
I keep hearing a legend about some bloke who only shoots on some (un-named) small Scottish island and allegedly does "very well" on Alamy - but I've never seen it substantiated, i.e. by a post by the bloke, or a link to his port, or even his name. I suspect that's an apocryphal tale, but I'd be intrigued to be proved wrong.
...but you can sell editorial product...go out, buy two bottles of wine. Open one, pour a glass and place the unopened bottle next to it over white with the brand showing, and walla! You have one down and 9 more to go. I read on the forums that micro brews sell well - I've been backed up shooting models (boudiar/pinup shoot this afternoon) and haven't gotten around to shooting the beer.
-
Thanks everybody for the valuable info. I have an RF account at Alamy but since that content is over the micros, I abandoned it. I felt it not to be fair to buyers to have such diverging price points for the same shots.
RM is another cup of tea. I had a look at the port of Jeff Greenberg and most looks like snapshots, anyways not the kind of imagery that would be accepted in micro, not even as editorial. You can very well see he doesn't put much time in post-processing, rather upload straight from cam to the site. He seems to walk around and snap whatever moves. It seems to sell too. Good to know. ;)
-
Thats good to hear.
Anyway, I believe if a site has less than 50k traffic, it is probably difficult to get a reliable trend out of compete.
I think all it does tell us, is that alamy is probably advertising a lot less on the internet in the us.
-
@Baldricks - he is only one guy. He travels to different places and shoots there. Recently he spent two or three days in New Orleans and added 450 images to his port. He does not edit much - he barely learned how to use the burn and dodge tool this year. He recently mentioned in a thread of another guy (topic of procrastination or some sort) that rather than a 1 image per day commitment, the guy should consider a 10 image per day commitment - as he does. It's not hard...think like a photographer, not a micro shooter and you'll find it to be relatively do-able.
It's not hard to get 1,000 images up on Alamy. This is especially true if you prove yourself and get accepted to upload either via the news/archival route or the creative route. If you commit to go out and shoot, you can create a fairly large portfolio quickly. I've added over 1,000 new images since May myself and my goal is another 4,000 by the end of 2012.
I have to be honest...and I know I'll stir the pot with this comment, but editorial images do not belong on the micros. These images are unique and your choice is to earn less than $5 or $6 US for these images on the micros, or earn (net) $40 on the images at a macro agency like Alamy for editorial licensing. This includes both newspapers and textbooks.
Creative images are different.
That's very interesting Ed. I'm not sure that churning out snapshots by the thousand (as someone just called his work) is "thinking like a photographer", maybe it is thinking like an old-time stock shooter - though wouldn't the waste of chromes have argued against that? Maybe it is shooting like a old-time stock shooter who has got his hands on a digital camera. It doesn't seem to be the norm, or Alamy would have 100 times as many shots.
I agree with you about editorial on the micros. It's not their market and their attempts to break into it don't seem to have had much success.
The hard bit with Alamy is the keywording, captioning and box ticking. If you are going to do it right, then you can't even bulk process that job, as each photo needs to be independently checked for how many people it has in it and whether or not it would need a property release. I suppose that if you are machine-gunning images to upload you just choose "more than four" and "no release" for property and let it go.
Do you check images for CA, sensor dust, WB adjustment, exposure, tone curve, vignetting, level horizons and noise before uploading, or do you just shoot a jpg and shove it up the tube uncorrected, despite the rejection risk? Basic corrections would take at least 10 minutes per image but must make it more saleable.
I must take issue with the idea of buying two bottles of wine, opening one, shooting it and then going to look for nine other subjects.... I would have to shoot the nine subjects first THEN open the wine ;)
Anyway, great information from a different perspective and as I've got a few thousand unused snapshots of different places I'll have a go at trying to monetise some of them.
-
Go for it, Baldrick! I wish I could find the photo, but I remember a few years ago there was a $10,000 sale of probably the ugliest snapshot I've ever seen. It was of an outdoor Asian market, horrible lighting, and it was so underexposed I could hardly tell what the subject was. Whatever was in that photo, a buyer wanted it so badly they paid $10,000 for the copyright!
I challenged myself after your "impossible" comment earlier to see how many images I could shoot, process, keyword, and upload in one evening. Got 40 shots of 21 different subjects completed in about 4 hours with ease...and all from the comfort of my couch...including the shooting. LOL If I did that every day, and it is possible, I'd have 14,600 images online in a year. New Year's resolution?!
Now for that bottle of wine Ed suggested to celebrate...
-
I've always liked alamy I made my first sale in my second month there ( July 2008) $114.70 a black widow spider.
I have 754 pictures there now
Total sales: $22664.75
Commission / charges: $-10390.22
Total payments to me: $-11330.18
:)
-
Well done julie123. Compared to my results on Alamy, yours are very good!
Clearly I've been sending them the wrong stuff! Time to break out that box of black widow spiders I have somewhere.
Now... where did I put that...?
-
I am sure you can make good money there. But I do wonder why there would be such a strong drop.
So what you are saying is - you havent seen or heard of any complaints of sales dropping significantly in 2011?
No, just complaints about value of sales decreasing, in general, being pulled down by the micros and 'buyer power' and special negotiations.
-
I have to be honest...and I know I'll stir the pot with this comment, but editorial images do not belong on the micros.
One of the problems is that micro buyers have not been used to editorial. Despite red type and editorial explanations, I'm finding several of my editorial images being used commercially (via GIS).
One iStock buyer SMd me asking if he could use a particular image for his project. I suggested he contact support with his particular project, but he chose to link me to the work he'd done on a comp, which , he said, he hadn't realised was Editorial. It was clearly a commercial project, and heavily manipulated to boot, so I said that was not a permitted use. He asked could I make it available for commercial use. Now let me see: it was a street scene with sixteen people, a restaurant, and several posters and that's before even zooming in on clothes and accessories. I found some vaguely similar shots, but of course they weren't 'real' enough. Then the pic sold twice in the ensuing week and I was left fretting.
Of course, this could happen on Alamy, but I guess micro customers are too used to being able to do almost anything they like with images. I have't seen mention of editorial images being used commercially on the Alamy forum, though obviously I have read about pics being used without any payment coming through; or of course, photos being lifted from legitimate purchased uses and used illegitimately, like from anywhere else.
-
I've had the same problem, Sue, which is why I no longer upload editorial shots to the micros. The buyers don't seem to realize or frankly care that they can be sued for using editorial images in commercial projects.
-
If you commit to go out and shoot, you can create a fairly large portfolio quickly.
... if you don't live in a rainy area, having one of its rainiest years on record. But also you either have to live in an area with photographic/saleable things around and/or going on or travel. Even the travelling takes time! If you live out in the boonies, your saleable shots are going to be limited in scope and variety.
I keep hearing a legend about some bloke who only shoots on some (un-named) small Scottish island and allegedly does "very well" on Alamy - but I've never seen it substantiated, i.e. by a post by the bloke, or a link to his port, or even his name. I suspect that's an apocryphal tale, but I'd be intrigued to be proved wrong.
...but you can sell editorial product...go out, buy two bottles of wine. Open one, pour a glass and place the unopened bottle next to it over white with the brand showing, and walla! You have one down and 9 more to go. I read on the forums that micro brews sell well - I've been backed up shooting models (boudiar/pinup shoot this afternoon) and haven't gotten around to shooting the beer.
The guy in the legend apparently isn't shooting studio-type stuff.
-
Go for it, Baldrick! I wish I could find the photo, but I remember a few years ago there was a $10,000 sale of probably the ugliest snapshot I've ever seen. It was of an outdoor Asian market, horrible lighting, and it was so underexposed I could hardly tell what the subject was. Whatever was in that photo, a buyer wanted it so badly they paid $10,000 for the copyright!
I challenged myself after your "impossible" comment earlier to see how many images I could shoot, process, keyword, and upload in one evening. Got 40 shots of 21 different subjects completed in about 4 hours with ease...and all from the comfort of my couch...including the shooting. LOL If I did that every day, and it is possible, I'd have 14,600 images online in a year. New Year's resolution?!
Now for that bottle of wine Ed suggested to celebrate...
Their biggest ever sale was an atrocious snapshot of a Spanish fishmonger's shop, more than $20,000. The things people want are truly odd.
You have my admiration for your effort. I've managed to pull out 60 travel shots from a single folder and run them through RAW conversion since yesterday (oh, and get a night's sleep). I still have to check them for sensor crud, straighten, add text and upload. I can't see myself completing that today. I'd love to know how you can do it.
-
This thread has actually made me a little more optimistic. I'm getting zooms, so eventually I should get a sale. I'll put my other images up there and just think of it as a lottery ticket.
-
Well, I've managed to sort, process and keyword 52 in about 24 hours, so it's possible - though the uploading will take several more hours and so will the final processing at Alamy. Presumably, I'm just slow (and so is my net connection).
Yes, stockastic, if you are getting zooms then sales should eventually follow. They used to reckon 10 zooms per sale but the sale may turn up months after the zoom. It's a very slow, long-term game.
-
What do you people mean by "geting zoom".. do you mean the number of views for photos ?
-
At Alamy, a view means your image came up in a search. A zoom means the buyer actually clicked on your image to take a closer look. Zooms are calculated into your placement ranking. Alamy is the only place that has views, zooms and placement rankings. On the micros, a view means someone clicked on your image.
-
What do you people mean by "geting zoom".. do you mean the number of views for photos ?
Alamy's terminology is different. A 'view' means only that your image was pulled up in a search, so presumably the buyer's eyes passed over the thumbnail. A 'zoom' means they clicked your thumb and looked at your image. Alamy gives you both these numbers. One thing that confused me at first is that by default, the displayed statistics include just the recent past. To see all your views and zooms since day 1 you change the starting date for the display.
-
Thank you Karin and Stockastic..
please do me another favour and tell that if one guy fails his 1st QC then is he informed by alamy in time and after how many days/hours can he retry the QC...?
is alamy very specific or strict for noise ? as i posted 4 pix last night and now when i look one of those pix i found moderate level noise in a portion of photo.. damnn i could not see that.. but its not that much as shown by alamy QC help section in an example photo... what are the chances that they don't qualify my 4 pix ? ???
-
Go for it, Baldrick! I wish I could find the photo, but I remember a few years ago there was a $10,000 sale of probably the ugliest snapshot I've ever seen. It was of an outdoor Asian market, horrible lighting, and it was so underexposed I could hardly tell what the subject was. Whatever was in that photo, a buyer wanted it so badly they paid $10,000 for the copyright!
Their biggest ever sale was an atrocious snapshot of a Spanish fishmonger's shop, more than $20,000. The things people want are truly odd.
That's the photo! OMG...it was really bad. LOL Wish I could find it so newer folks could see it.
-
Thank you Karin and Stockastic..
please do me another favour and tell that if one guy fails his 1st QC then is he informed by alamy in time and after how many days/hours can he retry the QC...?
is alamy very specific or strict for noise ? as i posted 4 pix last night and now when i look one of those pix i found moderate level noise in a portion of photo.. damnn i could not see that.. but its not that much as shown by alamy QC help section in an example photo... what are the chances that they don't qualify my 4 pix ? ???
Can't really answer that because I initially submitted a bunch of images that had already been approved at the big 3 sites so I had little doubt Alamy would approve. I then submitted photos in small batches because if Alamy rejects one image they reject the whole batch. I think I had one rejection, on an image which was admittedly questionable in certain ways. None of my images had noise problems, of that I'm certain. I was able to get 100 approved quite easily.
-
Go for it, Baldrick! I wish I could find the photo, but I remember a few years ago there was a $10,000 sale of probably the ugliest snapshot I've ever seen. It was of an outdoor Asian market, horrible lighting, and it was so underexposed I could hardly tell what the subject was. Whatever was in that photo, a buyer wanted it so badly they paid $10,000 for the copyright!
Their biggest ever sale was an atrocious snapshot of a Spanish fishmonger's shop, more than $20,000. The things people want are truly odd.
That's the photo! OMG...it was really bad. LOL Wish I could find it so newer folks could see it.
Yeah, dreadful ambient light from the wrong direction and all the heads of the people chopped off by the top of the frame. I remember it well. I've been working hard to create fish stall shots like that ever since but they just don't seem to create the same level of interest.
-
Well, I've managed to sort, process and keyword 52 in about 24 hours, so it's possible - though the uploading will take several more hours and so will the final processing at Alamy. Presumably, I'm just slow (and so is my net connection).
And remember these were just 21 things you had at hand. You will have to go to the bother of finding the next 21, and the next, it will just get harder.
But congrats: if I sat on my couch, all I could photograph would be 'untidy room facing left', 'untidy room facing right', 'untidy room straight on'
-
Go for it, Baldrick! I wish I could find the photo, but I remember a few years ago there was a $10,000 sale of probably the ugliest snapshot I've ever seen. It was of an outdoor Asian market, horrible lighting, and it was so underexposed I could hardly tell what the subject was. Whatever was in that photo, a buyer wanted it so badly they paid $10,000 for the copyright!
Their biggest ever sale was an atrocious snapshot of a Spanish fishmonger's shop, more than $20,000. The things people want are truly odd.
That's the photo! OMG...it was really bad. LOL Wish I could find it so newer folks could see it.
Yeah, dreadful ambient light from the wrong direction and all the heads of the people chopped off by the top of the frame. I remember it well. I've been working hard to create fish stall shots like that ever since but they just don't seem to create the same level of interest.
(http://forum.realityfanforum.com/Smileys/classic/laugh3.gif) (http://forum.realityfanforum.com/Smileys/classic/laugh3.gif) (http://forum.realityfanforum.com/Smileys/classic/laugh3.gif)
-
Well, I've managed to sort, process and keyword 52 in about 24 hours, so it's possible - though the uploading will take several more hours and so will the final processing at Alamy. Presumably, I'm just slow (and so is my net connection).
And remember these were just 21 things you had at hand. You will have to go to the bother of finding the next 21, and the next, it will just get harder.
But congrats: if I sat on my couch, all I could photograph would be 'untidy room facing left', 'untidy room facing right', 'untidy room straight on'
In all that untidiness resides some rather interesting objects, let me tell you! LOL Have we stumbled upon a new method of cleaning house? Shoot an object before putting it away in its proper place! ;D
-
Hey, Sue, give me credit, it was 52 not 21.
I think there is a mindset where I might be able to produce 300 or 400 a month but it would probably come down to shooting jpgs in volume and not worrying about composition etc.
Sure, if it was products just to slap on a table with a vaguely acceptable lighting set-up for editorial, that would be fairly easy but a lot of my satisfaction comes from improving my skills, not just doing barely acceptable stuff.
-
Hey, Sue, give me credit, it was 52 not 21.
I thought it was 52 shots of 21 objects?
-
Hey, Sue, give me credit, it was 52 not 21.
I thought it was 52 shots of 21 objects?
52 travel shots from the same old folder. It was Karimala who was doing objects.
-
Yep...that's me. 40 shots (now 60) of 21 subjects (now 27). ;D
-
You're all too fast for me, my old brain can't keep up!
-
Another note on the views and zooms at Alamy. I think that only certain registered buyers count towards these views and zooms - so it is technically possible to have a sale without any zooms or views (This could have changed or maybe I heard wrong).
for the last 2 years or so I seem to be at the ratio of 1 sale to 10 zooms to a bit under 1,000 views. I did get quite a bit more than 10 zooms before my first sale though, so there might be a big lag or maybe I was statistically unlucky at first.
-
You're all too fast for me, my old brain can't keep up!
I'll lay odds I'm older.
-
Another note on the views and zooms at Alamy. I think that only certain registered buyers count towards these views and zooms - so it is technically possible to have a sale without any zooms or views (This could have changed or maybe I heard wrong).
That's absolutely right, it's only the top customers which are registered as zooms. I'd say about half of my sales haven't been zoomed. And of those which are zoomed, it can be months before the sale registers.
-
That's very interesting Ed. I'm not sure that churning out snapshots by the thousand (as someone just called his work) is "thinking like a photographer", maybe it is thinking like an old-time stock shooter - though wouldn't the waste of chromes have argued against that? Maybe it is shooting like a old-time stock shooter who has got his hands on a digital camera. It doesn't seem to be the norm, or Alamy would have 100 times as many shots.
I agree with you about editorial on the micros. It's not their market and their attempts to break into it don't seem to have had much success.
The hard bit with Alamy is the keywording, captioning and box ticking. If you are going to do it right, then you can't even bulk process that job, as each photo needs to be independently checked for how many people it has in it and whether or not it would need a property release. I suppose that if you are machine-gunning images to upload you just choose "more than four" and "no release" for property and let it go.
Do you check images for CA, sensor dust, WB adjustment, exposure, tone curve, vignetting, level horizons and noise before uploading, or do you just shoot a jpg and shove it up the tube uncorrected, despite the rejection risk? Basic corrections would take at least 10 minutes per image but must make it more saleable.
I must take issue with the idea of buying two bottles of wine, opening one, shooting it and then going to look for nine other subjects.... I would have to shoot the nine subjects first THEN open the wine ;)
Anyway, great information from a different perspective and as I've got a few thousand unused snapshots of different places I'll have a go at trying to monetise some of them.
Yes, I do check for CA, dust, and all that stuff. I've been processing images all day today in fact (and I have a ton more to go through). My comment about thinking like a photographer as opposed to shooting for the micros relates to too many instances where I've read people on forums (or heard them personally) say "I can't shoot that because it has a label" or "I have to clone out this or that". Go out and shoot...it doesn't have to be a snapshot, but it doesn't have to follow the micro rules...
When it comes to editorial newsworthy images, I shoot raw and jpg. The jpg generally doesn't get edited and the images are submitted through the editorial/archival route. You just have to cull out the bad ones.
-
[....] I think you have to be accepted as a news photographer to get into their news stream and then you can't send them commercial work. [....].
If you have News Route uploading priviledges, you can use that news Route only to upload current news photos.
But you definitely can still submit other types of images, including commercial, using the regular "submit stock images" route.
-
[....] I think you have to be accepted as a news photographer to get into their news stream and then you can't send them commercial work. [....].
If you have News Route uploading priviledges, you can use that news Route only to upload current news photos.
But you definitely can still submit other types of images, including commercial, using the regular "submit stock images" route.
x2 - I missed this. I am approved for the new route...commercial (non-newsworthy) images are still submitted the normal route.
-
I'm have +300 images RF ( will start sending some RM in 2012 ), 100% acceptance rate, almost one year there and have one sale... novell use... 0,41c
Anyway, only last month I start re-keywording all images and start getting more zooms , better CTR.. lets hope ;D
;D
Ok, this month I get 3 zooms over 2 f-16 pictures, and one of them get a sale ( 3mb - 1350 x 900 pixels ): 131,40$ of Commission
I love Alamy @_@
BTW, get same time 2 on SS, 1 on FT... I refuse say how much I get over these 3 sales LOL
-
I'm have +300 images RF ( will start sending some RM in 2012 ), 100% acceptance rate, almost one year there and have one sale... novell use... 0,41c
Anyway, only last month I start re-keywording all images and start getting more zooms , better CTR.. lets hope ;D
;D
Ok, this month I get 3 zooms over 2 f-16 pictures, and one of them get a sale ( 3mb - 1350 x 900 pixels ): 131,40$ of Commission
I love Alamy @_@
BTW, get same time 2 on SS, 1 on FT... I refuse say how much I get over these 3 sales LOL
Hey you sold pic in alamy. Did not know that Congrats. :-)
-
Thank you Karin and Stockastic..
please do me another favour and tell that if one guy fails his 1st QC then is he informed by alamy in time and after how many days/hours can he retry the QC...?
is alamy very specific or strict for noise ? as i posted 4 pix last night and now when i look one of those pix i found moderate level noise in a portion of photo.. damnn i could not see that.. but its not that much as shown by alamy QC help section in an example photo... what are the chances that they don't qualify my 4 pix ? ???
I've submitted a few ISO 640, 800 and 1600 images to Alamy with no QC failures yet. I did remove the chroma (color) noise but left the luminance noise slider alone in the RAW convertor. No noise reduction software used after either.
-
Thank you Karin and Stockastic..
please do me another favour and tell that if one guy fails his 1st QC then is he informed by alamy in time and after how many days/hours can he retry the QC...?
is alamy very specific or strict for noise ? as i posted 4 pix last night and now when i look one of those pix i found moderate level noise in a portion of photo.. damnn i could not see that.. but its not that much as shown by alamy QC help section in an example photo... what are the chances that they don't qualify my 4 pix ? ???
I've submitted a few ISO 640, 800 and 1600 images to Alamy with no QC failures yet. I did remove the chroma (color) noise but left the luminance noise slider alone in the RAW convertor. No noise reduction software used after either.
But i was informed last night only that my 1 pic was disqualified due to "soft or lacking definition"...
I wanna ask you people that can i just replace the failed pic with new one and resubmit with rest 3 old pix for my 2nd QC ?
-
I think you can but you would do best to read the submission guidelines carefully to see if you can.
Also, be aware that they may only have looked at one photo, rejected it and not bothered to check the others, so they may not have actually passed.
-
Baldricks... I submitted 2 old and 2 new files in my 2nd QC...
-
have had images on alamy for a few months, first sale just now $2.. I have about 180 images...
I have just posted regarding my first sale..
-
Old Thread alert!!!! Real old!
-
Quite interesting reading ancient history though.